Opinions.

Everybody has them. Until, possibly, they don't. What are opinions, exactly? Biases masquerading as preferences, and reactions to the conflicting preferences of others? A stand-in for actual knowledge?

People often see me as opinionated, being unable to define what I am in any other way. I submit that the lack of opinion can closely resemble opinion. How can these two polar opposites be so similar in appearance? How can they be accurately differentiated?

Everybody has them. Until, possibly, they don't. What are opinions, exactly? Biases masquerading as preferences, and reactions to the conflicting preferences of others? A stand-in for actual knowledge?

I don't know about the second part of your question, but philosophically opinion might be labelled as 'belief' and opposed to 'knowledge'. Belief is a proposition (like "'x' is 'y'") that is held but which isn't necessarily justified (even though it might be true. I.e. it could be held but not for the right reasons. I might say there are 200,121,434 flies in the world, this could be correct, but I am unjustified in asserting this as a truth because I have no way of knowing it's truth). Knowledge is a proposition that is held, happens to be true, and which is justified (for example if i've actually collected every single fly and counted them).

Maybe it is just me, but people who ask for proof that flies exist are just lazy. To know what a fly is, requires experience. Sure, I can demonstrate that they must exist in the natural world. I can even show you a fly's carcass, but really, what do you know? (You don't know shit actually) To read about a fly or to be told what a fly is only a portion of the picture. You don't even know what the fly really is until the little fucker flies near your ear and you have to swat it away.

Wait we were talking about God. Hmm. Well no need to change anything I guess.

Maybe it is just me, but people who ask for proof that flies exist are just lazy. To know what a fly is, requires experience. Sure, I can demonstrate that they must exist in the natural world. I can even show you a fly's carcass, but really, what do you know? (You don't know shit actually) To read about a fly or to be told what a fly is only a portion of the picture. You don't even know what the fly really is until the little fucker flies near your ear and you have to swat it away.

Wait we were talking about God. Hmm. Well no need to change anything I guess.

Who really knows what is a fly? We can know its manifestation, but its inner being or soul is a mystery. You got to know All to know what really is a fly.

Maybe it is just me, but people who ask for proof that flies exist are just lazy. To know what a fly is, requires experience. Sure, I can demonstrate that they must exist in the natural world. I can even show you a fly's carcass, but really, what do you know? (You don't know shit actually) To read about a fly or to be told what a fly is only a portion of the picture. You don't even know what the fly really is until the little fucker flies near your ear and you have to swat it away.

Wait we were talking about God. Hmm. Well no need to change anything I guess.

Who really knows what is a fly? We can know its manifestation, but its inner being or soul is a mystery. You got to know All to know what really is a fly.

Hence

experience > *

I guess we are on the same page here, no? Or is the whiskey finally getting to me?

The whiskey is getting to you. I get told, over and over that experience counts for nothing because it is 'subjective'. That only logical 'proof' is acceptable. Which tells me the ones saying things like this have no experience of anything. Life, for them, remains unlived, and unliveable, since what point would there be, since living is all about experience? There is no way to make any contact with such people. They have traded actual life for a theoretical life. Communication? Can't be done.